71:
for its existence is the desirability of the Bailey, which the combination of the Motte and ditch makes relatively easy to retain despite attack by marauders. When only lightly pressed, the ditch makes small numbers of attackers easy to defeat as they struggle across it: when heavily pressed the ditch is not defensible and so neither is the Bailey. Rather one retreats to the insalubrious but defensible, perhaps impregnable, Motte. Eventually the marauders give up, when one is well placed to reoccupy desirable land.
219:
The softening up is effected by convincing the audience that the dual meaning is somehow an exposition of a profundity. ... the strategy is, as in
Foucault's "Truth and power", to first make use of the word in its redefined sense, then present the redefinition as if it had already been established as the deeper content of the concept. Finally, the impression of profundity is sealed by passages which elide both meanings at once.
47:
1668:
1694:
456:
Some people have spoken of a Motte and Bailey
Doctrine as being a fallacy and others of it being a matter of strategic equivocation. Strictly speaking, neither is correct. ... So it is, perhaps, noting the common deployment of such rhetorical trickeries that has led many people using the concept
236:
the other's position beyond what is required to attack it; Harris criticized such usage of the motte-and-bailey concept for "avoiding a true fight" by portraying the other unfairly, which Harris called the "offensive corollary" of the other's retreat to the defensive motte. In other words, the person
141:
as "whatever people take to be knowledge", without distinguishing between beliefs that are widely accepted but contrary to reality, and beliefs that correspond to reality. In this instance, the easily defensible motte would be the idea that what we call knowledge is what is commonly accepted as such,
349:
A skilled pseudoscientist switches back and forth between different versions of his theory, and may even exploit his own equivocations to accuse his critics of misrepresenting his position. Philosopher
Nicholas Shackel has termed this strategy the 'Motte and Bailey Doctrines' (Shackel 2005; see also
218:
Unlike normal examples of equivocation where one exploits already existing, perhaps quite subtle, differences of meaning, Humpty
Dumptying is hardly subtle. The differences in meaning are so obvious that equivocating by use of them cannot normally be pursued without first softening up the audience.
70:
A Motte and Bailey castle is a medieval system of defence in which a stone tower on a mound (the Motte) is surrounded by an area of land (the Bailey) which in turn is encompassed by some sort of a barrier such as a ditch. Being dark and dank, the Motte is not a habitation of choice. The only reason
415:
For my purposes the desirable but only lightly defensible territory of the Motte and Bailey castle, that is to say, the Bailey, represents a philosophical doctrine or position with similar properties: desirable to its proponent but only lightly defensible. The Motte is the defensible but undesired
37:
where an arguer conflates two positions that share similarities, one modest and easy to defend (the "motte") and one much more controversial and harder to defend (the "bailey"). The arguer advances the controversial position, but when challenged, insists that only the more modest position is being
237:
who attacks someone else for retreating to the motte could be "just as guilty" of retreating to a "siege engine" instead of engaging in a deeper dialogue with the other "out on the bailey". Harris pleaded for a rhetorical analysis that would explore disagreements more carefully and respectfully.
38:
advanced. Upon retreating to the motte, the arguer can claim that the bailey has not been refuted (because the critic refused to attack the motte) or that the critic is unreasonable (by equating an attack on the bailey with an attack on the motte).
74:
represents a philosophical doctrine or position with similar properties: desirable to its proponent but only lightly defensible. The Motte is the defensible but undesired position to which one retreats when hard
483:
142:
but the prized bailey would be that scientific knowledge is no different from other widely accepted beliefs, implying truth and reality play no role in gaining scientific knowledge.
228:
Responding to
Shackel's use of the motte-and-bailey concept, professor of rhetoric Randy Allen Harris objected to what he saw as the use of the concept to gratuitously violate the
122:". In this example, the motte is that our beliefs about right and wrong are socially constructed, while the bailey is that there is no such thing as right and wrong.
584:
Informal Logic @ 25: Proceedings of the 5th
International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA 5), Windsor, Canada, 14–17 May 2003
568:
Informal Logic @ 25: Proceedings of the 5th
International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA 5), Windsor, Canada, 14–17 May 2003
785:
790:
181:" in order to create the illusion of "giving a profound but subtle analysis of a taken-for-granted concept". Shackel labeled this type of strategic rhetorical
389:
350:
Fusfield 1993), after the medieval defense system in which a stone tower (the Motte) is surrounded by an area of open land (the Bailey) ...
1168:
825:
667:
96:
979:
134:
79:
Shackel's original impetus was to criticize what he considered duplicitous processes of argumentation in works of academics such as
353:
Boudry and
Braekman said that a retreat to the motte in a motte-and-bailey doctrine is a "deflationary revision" that is used by
170:
1587:
795:
1684:
1714:
1623:
1599:
1188:
178:
1200:
944:
1210:
1618:
1175:
1071:
191:
1453:
921:
757:
713:
625:
397:
1633:
1448:
964:
660:
488:
436:
138:
26:
1555:
1545:
1495:
1469:
1245:
1119:
1086:
987:
969:
869:
718:
700:
166:
119:
579:
563:
1593:
1581:
1561:
1550:
1465:
1278:
1254:
1076:
1032:
884:
810:
723:
587:
571:
323:
155:
100:
88:
1608:
1512:
1476:
1391:
1347:
1183:
1114:
904:
733:
708:
444:
288:
252:
246:
229:
1486:
1385:
1332:
1308:
1231:
1134:
1066:
992:
805:
800:
777:
752:
270:
185:
of the broad colloquial understanding of a term with a technical, artificially stipulated one as "
1671:
1604:
1418:
1303:
1288:
1235:
1195:
1144:
1081:
1040:
1017:
997:
900:
744:
728:
653:
539:
340:
276:
1698:
1490:
1327:
1317:
1293:
1270:
1226:
1152:
1104:
1062:
1022:
864:
859:
681:
1640:
1481:
1380:
1322:
1260:
1055:
934:
929:
914:
879:
839:
767:
762:
630:
531:
406:
332:
130:
107:
34:
1361:
1337:
1157:
1129:
1109:
957:
925:
909:
354:
318:
258:
162:
80:
58:
Philosopher
Nicholas Shackel, who coined the term, prefers to speak of a motte-and-bailey
1397:
874:
202:
In
Shackel's description, a motte-and-bailey doctrine relies on overawing outsiders with
1298:
1283:
1205:
1124:
1050:
690:
314:
264:
207:
158:, which is the substitution of one concept for another without the audience realizing.
46:
1708:
1423:
1313:
1045:
1008:
952:
820:
815:
543:
410:
344:
186:
92:
1435:
854:
203:
151:
279: – Techniques in which partisans create an image that favours their interests
66:. In 2005, Shackel described the reference to medieval castle defense like this:
1628:
1405:
1342:
461:. Nevertheless, I think it is clearly worth distinguishing the Motte and Bailey
126:
84:
1538:
1532:
1459:
1371:
606:
535:
484:"The 'Motte & Bailey': Political Jousting's Deceptive New Medieval Weapon"
358:
336:
233:
182:
1645:
1429:
1413:
1096:
282:
267: – Systematic pattern of deviation from norm or rationality in judgment
1575:
199:
use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
645:
512:
1523:
30:
677:
211:
321:(May 2010). "Immunizing strategies and epistemic defense mechanisms".
50:
A motte and bailey castle. The motte is the hill with the fortified
576:
Harris was commenting on Shackel's paper from the same conference:
174:
137:
made use of a motte-and-bailey doctrine when trying to defend his
45:
51:
649:
261: – Form of fraud used in retail sales or in other contexts
118:
An example given by Shackel is the statement "morality is
416:
position to which one retreats when hard pressed ...
106:
The motte-and-bailey concept was popularized on the blog
232:
by distorting other people's arguments and failing to
1682:
1522:
1510:
1369:
1360:
1269:
1244:
1219:
1143:
1095:
1031:
1006:
978:
943:
893:
847:
838:
776:
742:
698:
689:
309:
307:
305:
383:
381:
379:
377:
375:
373:
371:
369:
367:
150:The fallacy has been described as an instance of
465:from a particular fallacious exploitation of it.
357:to "immunize" a theory or belief system against
216:
68:
786:Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise
457:to speak of it in terms of a Motte and Bailey
161:In Shackel's original article, he argued that
54:on top; the bailey is the larger, fenced area.
791:Negative conclusion from affirmative premises
661:
8:
255: – Academic field of logic and rhetoric
1519:
1366:
1241:
844:
695:
668:
654:
646:
477:
475:
473:
390:"The Vacuity of Postmodernist Methodology"
430:
428:
426:
424:
171:elementary but inherently equivocal terms
626:"All in All, Another Brick in the Motte"
608:The Motte & Bailey Fallacy (Lecture)
557:
555:
553:
1689:
301:
435:Shackel, Nicholas (5 September 2014).
273: – Concept in Aristotelian ethics
605:Anadale, Christopher (10 June 2019).
7:
624:Alexander, Scott (3 November 2014).
515:A Theory of Philosophical Fallacies
189:", in reference to an exchange in
14:
285: – Fallacy in informal logic
135:sociology of scientific knowledge
1692:
1667:
1666:
411:10.1111/j.1467-9973.2005.00370.x
195:where that character says "When
482:Murawski, John (19 June 2020).
1164:Correlation implies causation
578:Shackel, Nicholas (May 2003).
511:Aberdein, Andrew (June 2017).
1:
437:"Motte and Bailey Doctrines"
580:"Two Rhetorical Manoeuvres"
1731:
1588:I'm entitled to my opinion
562:Harris, Randy (May 2003).
388:Shackel, Nicholas (2005).
1662:
1571:
1444:
536:10.1007/s10503-016-9398-2
337:10.1007/s11406-010-9254-9
192:Through The Looking-Glass
1614:Motte-and-bailey fallacy
714:Affirming the consequent
249: – Type of argument
101:postmodernist discourses
23:motte-and-bailey fallacy
16:Type of informal fallacy
1634:Two wrongs make a right
965:Denying the correlative
564:"Commentary on Shackel"
489:RealClearInvestigations
139:conception of knowledge
27:motte-and-bailey castle
1619:Psychologist's fallacy
1556:Argument to moderation
1546:Argument from anecdote
1496:Chronological snobbery
1120:Quoting out of context
1087:Overwhelming exception
970:Suppressed correlative
870:Quoting out of context
745:quantificational logic
719:Denying the antecedent
221:
167:arbitrary redefinition
125:According to Shackel,
77:
55:
1582:The Four Great Errors
1562:Argumentum ad populum
1551:Argument from silence
1255:Argumentum ad baculum
1033:Faulty generalization
724:Argument from fallacy
588:University of Windsor
572:University of Windsor
291: – English idiom
89:Jean-Francois Lyotard
49:
1600:Invincible ignorance
1406:Reductio ad Stalinum
1392:Reductio ad Hitlerum
1348:Wisdom of repugnance
1115:Moving the goalposts
980:Illicit transference
905:Begging the question
826:Undistributed middle
734:Mathematical fallacy
709:Affirming a disjunct
445:University of Oxford
331:(1): 145–161 (150).
289:Tilting at windmills
253:Argumentation theory
247:Argumentation scheme
230:principle of charity
206:, similarly to what
154:, more specifically
120:socially constructed
1715:Relevance fallacies
1333:Parade of horribles
1309:In-group favoritism
1135:Syntactic ambiguity
778:Syllogistic fallacy
701:propositional logic
271:Intellectual virtue
97:Berger and Luckmann
1419:Poisoning the well
1236:Proof by assertion
1211:Texas sharpshooter
1145:Questionable cause
1082:Slothful induction
1041:Anecdotal evidence
901:Circular reasoning
796:Exclusive premises
758:Illicit conversion
277:Media manipulation
56:
1680:
1679:
1658:
1657:
1654:
1653:
1594:Ignoratio elenchi
1506:
1505:
1356:
1355:
1318:Not invented here
1023:Converse accident
945:Correlative-based
922:Compound question
865:False attribution
860:False equivalence
834:
833:
513:"Leonard Nelson:
224:Critical analysis
204:pseudo-profundity
25:(named after the
1722:
1697:
1696:
1695:
1688:
1670:
1669:
1641:Special pleading
1520:
1381:Appeal to motive
1367:
1343:Stirring symbols
1323:Island mentality
1261:Wishful thinking
1242:
958:Perfect solution
935:No true Scotsman
930:Complex question
915:Leading question
894:Question-begging
880:No true Scotsman
845:
768:Quantifier shift
763:Proof by example
696:
670:
663:
656:
647:
642:
640:
638:
631:Slate Star Codex
620:
618:
616:
611:(video). YouTube
592:
591:
575:
559:
548:
547:
521:
508:
502:
501:
499:
497:
479:
468:
467:
453:
451:
441:Practical Ethics
432:
419:
418:
394:
385:
362:
355:pseudoscientists
352:
319:Braeckman, Johan
311:
187:Humpty Dumptying
156:concept-swapping
146:Related concepts
131:strong programme
108:Slate Star Codex
35:informal fallacy
1730:
1729:
1725:
1724:
1723:
1721:
1720:
1719:
1705:
1704:
1703:
1693:
1691:
1683:
1681:
1676:
1650:
1624:Rationalization
1567:
1514:
1502:
1440:
1362:Genetic fallacy
1352:
1265:
1240:
1215:
1139:
1130:Sorites paradox
1110:False precision
1091:
1072:Double counting
1027:
1002:
974:
939:
926:Loaded question
910:Loaded language
889:
830:
772:
738:
685:
674:
636:
634:
623:
614:
612:
604:
601:
596:
595:
577:
561:
560:
551:
519:
510:
509:
505:
495:
493:
481:
480:
471:
449:
447:
434:
433:
422:
392:
387:
386:
365:
315:Boudry, Maarten
313:
312:
303:
298:
259:Bait-and-switch
243:
226:
163:Michel Foucault
148:
116:
81:Michel Foucault
44:
29:) is a form of
17:
12:
11:
5:
1728:
1726:
1718:
1717:
1707:
1706:
1702:
1701:
1678:
1677:
1675:
1674:
1663:
1660:
1659:
1656:
1655:
1652:
1651:
1649:
1648:
1643:
1638:
1637:
1636:
1626:
1621:
1616:
1611:
1602:
1597:
1590:
1585:
1578:
1572:
1569:
1568:
1566:
1565:
1558:
1553:
1548:
1543:
1542:
1541:
1528:
1526:
1517:
1508:
1507:
1504:
1503:
1501:
1500:
1499:
1498:
1484:
1479:
1474:
1473:
1472:
1463:
1456:
1454:Accomplishment
1445:
1442:
1441:
1439:
1438:
1433:
1426:
1421:
1416:
1411:
1410:
1409:
1402:
1401:
1400:
1383:
1377:
1375:
1364:
1358:
1357:
1354:
1353:
1351:
1350:
1345:
1340:
1335:
1330:
1325:
1320:
1311:
1306:
1301:
1296:
1291:
1286:
1281:
1275:
1273:
1267:
1266:
1264:
1263:
1258:
1250:
1248:
1239:
1238:
1229:
1223:
1221:
1217:
1216:
1214:
1213:
1208:
1206:Slippery slope
1203:
1198:
1193:
1192:
1191:
1181:
1180:
1179:
1172:
1162:
1161:
1160:
1149:
1147:
1141:
1140:
1138:
1137:
1132:
1127:
1125:Slippery slope
1122:
1117:
1112:
1107:
1101:
1099:
1093:
1092:
1090:
1089:
1084:
1079:
1074:
1069:
1060:
1059:
1058:
1053:
1051:Cherry picking
1043:
1037:
1035:
1029:
1028:
1026:
1025:
1020:
1014:
1012:
1004:
1003:
1001:
1000:
995:
990:
984:
982:
976:
975:
973:
972:
967:
962:
961:
960:
949:
947:
941:
940:
938:
937:
932:
919:
918:
917:
907:
897:
895:
891:
890:
888:
887:
882:
877:
872:
867:
862:
857:
851:
849:
842:
836:
835:
832:
831:
829:
828:
823:
818:
813:
808:
803:
798:
793:
788:
782:
780:
774:
773:
771:
770:
765:
760:
755:
749:
747:
740:
739:
737:
736:
731:
726:
721:
716:
711:
705:
703:
693:
687:
686:
675:
673:
672:
665:
658:
650:
644:
643:
621:
600:
599:External links
597:
594:
593:
549:
530:(2): 455–461.
517:(book review)"
503:
469:
420:
405:(3): 295–320.
398:Metaphilosophy
363:
300:
299:
297:
294:
293:
292:
286:
280:
274:
268:
265:Cognitive bias
262:
256:
250:
242:
239:
225:
222:
208:Daniel Dennett
147:
144:
115:
112:
43:
40:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1727:
1716:
1713:
1712:
1710:
1700:
1690:
1686:
1673:
1665:
1664:
1661:
1647:
1644:
1642:
1639:
1635:
1632:
1631:
1630:
1627:
1625:
1622:
1620:
1617:
1615:
1612:
1610:
1606:
1603:
1601:
1598:
1596:
1595:
1591:
1589:
1586:
1584:
1583:
1579:
1577:
1574:
1573:
1570:
1564:
1563:
1559:
1557:
1554:
1552:
1549:
1547:
1544:
1540:
1537:
1536:
1535:
1534:
1530:
1529:
1527:
1525:
1521:
1518:
1516:
1509:
1497:
1494:
1493:
1492:
1488:
1485:
1483:
1480:
1478:
1475:
1471:
1467:
1464:
1462:
1461:
1457:
1455:
1452:
1451:
1450:
1447:
1446:
1443:
1437:
1434:
1432:
1431:
1427:
1425:
1422:
1420:
1417:
1415:
1412:
1408:
1407:
1403:
1399:
1396:
1395:
1394:
1393:
1389:
1388:
1387:
1384:
1382:
1379:
1378:
1376:
1374:
1373:
1368:
1365:
1363:
1359:
1349:
1346:
1344:
1341:
1339:
1336:
1334:
1331:
1329:
1326:
1324:
1321:
1319:
1315:
1314:Invented here
1312:
1310:
1307:
1305:
1302:
1300:
1297:
1295:
1292:
1290:
1287:
1285:
1282:
1280:
1277:
1276:
1274:
1272:
1268:
1262:
1259:
1257:
1256:
1252:
1251:
1249:
1247:
1243:
1237:
1233:
1230:
1228:
1225:
1224:
1222:
1218:
1212:
1209:
1207:
1204:
1202:
1199:
1197:
1194:
1190:
1187:
1186:
1185:
1182:
1178:
1177:
1173:
1171:
1170:
1166:
1165:
1163:
1159:
1156:
1155:
1154:
1151:
1150:
1148:
1146:
1142:
1136:
1133:
1131:
1128:
1126:
1123:
1121:
1118:
1116:
1113:
1111:
1108:
1106:
1103:
1102:
1100:
1098:
1094:
1088:
1085:
1083:
1080:
1078:
1077:False analogy
1075:
1073:
1070:
1068:
1064:
1061:
1057:
1054:
1052:
1049:
1048:
1047:
1046:Sampling bias
1044:
1042:
1039:
1038:
1036:
1034:
1030:
1024:
1021:
1019:
1016:
1015:
1013:
1011:
1010:
1009:Secundum quid
1005:
999:
996:
994:
991:
989:
986:
985:
983:
981:
977:
971:
968:
966:
963:
959:
956:
955:
954:
953:False dilemma
951:
950:
948:
946:
942:
936:
933:
931:
927:
923:
920:
916:
913:
912:
911:
908:
906:
902:
899:
898:
896:
892:
886:
883:
881:
878:
876:
873:
871:
868:
866:
863:
861:
858:
856:
853:
852:
850:
846:
843:
841:
837:
827:
824:
822:
821:Illicit minor
819:
817:
816:Illicit major
814:
812:
809:
807:
804:
802:
799:
797:
794:
792:
789:
787:
784:
783:
781:
779:
775:
769:
766:
764:
761:
759:
756:
754:
751:
750:
748:
746:
741:
735:
732:
730:
727:
725:
722:
720:
717:
715:
712:
710:
707:
706:
704:
702:
697:
694:
692:
688:
683:
679:
671:
666:
664:
659:
657:
652:
651:
648:
633:
632:
627:
622:
610:
609:
603:
602:
598:
589:
585:
581:
573:
569:
565:
558:
556:
554:
550:
545:
541:
537:
533:
529:
525:
524:Argumentation
518:
516:
507:
504:
491:
490:
485:
478:
476:
474:
470:
466:
464:
460:
446:
442:
438:
431:
429:
427:
425:
421:
417:
412:
408:
404:
400:
399:
391:
384:
382:
380:
378:
376:
374:
372:
370:
368:
364:
360:
356:
351:
346:
342:
338:
334:
330:
326:
325:
320:
316:
310:
308:
306:
302:
295:
290:
287:
284:
281:
278:
275:
272:
269:
266:
263:
260:
257:
254:
251:
248:
245:
244:
240:
238:
235:
231:
223:
220:
215:
213:
209:
205:
200:
198:
194:
193:
188:
184:
180:
176:
172:
168:
164:
159:
157:
153:
145:
143:
140:
136:
132:
128:
123:
121:
113:
111:
109:
104:
102:
98:
94:
93:Richard Rorty
90:
86:
82:
76:
72:
67:
65:
62:instead of a
61:
53:
48:
41:
39:
36:
32:
28:
24:
19:
1613:
1609:Naturalistic
1592:
1580:
1560:
1531:
1515:of relevance
1458:
1436:Whataboutism
1428:
1404:
1398:Godwin's law
1390:
1370:
1253:
1246:Consequences
1227:Law/Legality
1201:Single cause
1174:
1167:
1007:
875:Loki's Wager
855:Equivocation
848:Equivocation
635:. Retrieved
629:
613:. Retrieved
607:
583:
567:
527:
523:
514:
506:
494:. Retrieved
487:
462:
458:
455:
448:. Retrieved
440:
414:
402:
396:
348:
328:
322:
227:
217:
201:
196:
190:
160:
152:equivocation
149:
124:
117:
105:
103:in general.
78:
73:
69:
63:
59:
57:
22:
20:
18:
1629:Red herring
1386:Association
1067:Conjunction
988:Composition
885:Reification
801:Existential
753:Existential
586:. Windsor:
570:. Windsor:
324:Philosophia
127:David Bloor
85:David Bloor
1699:Philosophy
1605:Moralistic
1539:Sealioning
1533:Ad nauseam
1460:Ipse dixit
1372:Ad hominem
1196:Regression
998:Ecological
811:Four terms
729:Masked man
359:refutation
296:References
234:understand
183:conflation
165:employed "
1646:Straw man
1524:Arguments
1513:fallacies
1487:Tradition
1477:Etymology
1449:Authority
1430:Tu quoque
1414:Bulverism
1184:Gambler's
1153:Animistic
1097:Ambiguity
1063:Base rate
806:Necessity
678:fallacies
544:148413229
345:145581898
283:Pooh-pooh
210:called a
173:such as "
110:in 2014.
99:, and in
1709:Category
1672:Category
1304:Ridicule
1289:Flattery
1279:Children
1176:Post hoc
1056:McNamara
1018:Accident
993:Division
840:Informal
492:. online
463:Doctrine
241:See also
133:for the
114:Examples
75:pressed.
60:doctrine
31:argument
1491:Novelty
1466:Poverty
1328:Loyalty
1294:Novelty
1271:Emotion
1220:Appeals
1189:Inverse
1169:Cum hoc
1158:Furtive
676:Common
615:19 June
496:19 June
459:fallacy
212:deepity
177:" and "
64:fallacy
42:History
33:and an
1685:Portal
1576:Cliché
1511:Other
1482:Nature
1470:Wealth
1105:Accent
691:Formal
637:6 July
542:
450:23 May
343:
95:, and
1338:Spite
1232:Stone
540:S2CID
520:(PDF)
393:(PDF)
341:S2CID
179:power
175:truth
169:" of
1424:Tone
1299:Pity
1284:Fear
682:list
639:2024
617:2020
498:2020
452:2019
52:keep
21:The
743:In
699:In
532:doi
407:doi
333:doi
129:'s
1711::
1607:/
1489:/
1468:/
1316:/
1234:/
1065:/
928:/
924:/
903:/
628:.
582:.
566:.
552:^
538:.
528:31
526:.
522:.
486:.
472:^
454:.
443:.
439:.
423:^
413:.
403:36
401:.
395:.
366:^
347:.
339:.
329:39
327:.
317:;
304:^
214:.
91:,
87:,
83:,
1687::
684:)
680:(
669:e
662:t
655:v
641:.
619:.
590:.
574:.
546:.
534::
500:.
409::
361:.
335::
197:I
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
